USA - Bunker Busting
July 2003 - 9 min 00 sec
Shelters, tunnels and underground bunkers were hot topics before the war in Iraq.
Saddam’s presidential palace in Baghdad was assumed to house a network of such underground hideaways, and was quickly annihilated in the hunt to sniff out Hussein himself. But now, despite intensive searching, the Americans have not managed to find anything of the sort. But the change in focus of the international arms race – to create weapons specifically designed to seek and destroy underground bunkers - has lingered on. The most effective way of destroying subterranean hide-outs, according to proponents of a controversial new bunker busting bomb, is by using nuclear weapons.
0'43 The task of developing such a weapon has fallen on bomb manufacturer Los Alamos. The Bunker Busters, seen here in action penetrating an underground hiding place in Afghanistan, could in the future be equipped with atomic weapon-heads. Many republican senators see doing so as the utmost necessity.
0'58 (INSERT with 1'02") OT senator John Kyl (republican)?
We know from the secret service that there is a quantity of states, which know one: If one entrenches oneself deeply enough, with enough concrete and steel over the head, then they can not get one. Exactly our potential enemies build that today, and there is only one way against it: a precise, small nuclear weapon." ENG
1'20 These mini-atom bombs are intended to wreak their havoc far underground, according to the bomb’s supporters. Any bio-chemical weapons material hidden in underground bunkers would be instantly engulfed in a huge several thousand degree fireball and destroyed. Radiation would remain underground, well shielded from civilian populations.
But environmental organizations figure differently. They say, each of these atom bombs would pollute the earth around the bomb site, and is almost impossible to control..
1'56 "(INSERT with 1'59") Matthew McKinzie physicist, environmental's group of NRDC?
A ten kiloton bomb, which is many smaller than the bomb of Hiroshima, would have to explode 50 meters deeply in the earth, in order to cause no atomic fall out. The only deeply penetrating bomb, which we have at present, comes perhaps somewhat more than three meters deeply. If it penetrates more deeply, it becomes broken."
Short OT Kennedy (untranslated)
2'26 There is bitter opposition to the bomb. Democrat senator Edward Kennedy is worried about the consequences – what if the US deployed such a bomb in Syria, with fallout that could spread to Israel?
2'37 OT Edward Kennedy senator, democrat
Auf the side say the Americans to North Korea, look, we want with you to negotiate, in order to reduce the atomic danger in Korea, but then we say, do not hear not on what we say, we develop here new weapons. How is that to function in the today's world? Who removes us?
3'06 OT Donald Rumsfeld US Secretary of Defense
It is a study, nothing more and nothing less. It is not safe aiming at, no developing, no building, no stationing, and no use."
3'19 "OT Dianne Feinstein Senatorin, democrat?
Nur a study nonsense! Does that believe any? This resolution opens the doors for America to be able to develop over again nuclear weapons."
3'33 "in the Second World War had the researchers into of Los Alamos the atom bomb developed, now get them new, prestigious work. The research contracts for the building of the mini bombs and shelter crushers give again lift, possible next step to the atomic program are recent bomb tests.
3'52 "(INSERT with 3'55") Matthew McKinzie physicist, environmental's group of NRDC of?
Es gives the desire to use nuclear knowledge and abilities again which are fallow-convenient since the end of the cold war, and on which that possibly runs out, that is the retake of nuclear tests in the United States."
4'12 "also in the recent senatorial decree is of the fact the speech that new US atomic tests could come faster than expected. Still they are a world-wide taboo, but the USA reserve themselves to break this taboo at one time of their choice.
4`29 of one of the most renowned European armament experts, Francois Heisbourg, evaluates the American decision calmly. As long as they served only the deterrence, new nuclear weapons were actually still no enormous increase of the risk:
4`42 Ot Professor Francois Heisbourg, ii-S S and IR of Paris
"already since the end of the forties developed and also stationed the USA incessant tactical nuclear weapons, thus?mini nukes". The pallet reaches from nuclear mortar cannons, nuclear luft-Luft-Raketen, nuclear underwater mines - up to the famous?Rucksack bombs "- which was everything in Europe up to the end of the cold war stationed. Thus it would be wrong to call that now revolution."
5`25 indeed was remarkably that with the 300-Jahr-Feiern in pc. Petersburg on the past weekend the American resumption of the nuclear arms research was mentioned by of Russia president Putin with no word, at least not public. In the opposite: one zelebrierte proudly the last signature under of the Russian Duma only days before ratified disarmament agreement SORT. Therefore the USA and Russia want to reduce their strategic nuclear weapons in ten years to one thousand seven hundreds each to two thousand two hundred sprengkoepfe.
6`03 PUTIN (clay/tone on) 6`07 it gives no alternative to co-operation between America and Russia, meant Putin. That applies to the armements policy, in addition, to the fight against the terrorism and to international stability.
6`20 the old arsenals are vacated, destroyed rockets - partly by breakup in air like here - with worth millions financial assistance from the west. President Putin likewise announced the development of new and modern nuclear weapons at the same time. A new arms race?
6`46 - OT Francois Heisbourg "the danger of a return to the arms race proceeds not with the current American decision, but from the Bush doctrine... With this doctrine of the preventive impact say the USA, it unpopular states will attack, before these are in the possession of massenvernichtungswaffen. That it is to be become also a reason for it that North Korea doubled its efforts, an adequate country possessing atomic weapons and the fact that Iran in Natan must take and elsewhere as fast as possible Transfugeuse....baut "
7`37 Russia again its place under prominent powers of the world, demanded president Putin recently and quit a large modernization of the army on......... But not that will lead present world politics of the Bush government to new tensions with the USA, but.
HEISBOURG?Grosse tensions between Russia and the USA to grow up I see
7`53 Ot because of the kind of Washington of treating the Iran question. In pc. Petersburg and with the G-8-Gipfel in Evian much was discussed. And I fear tensions between the USA and most partners due to the doctrine of prevention and the preventive impact, because this doctrine moves outside of all rules of the international right. I find that many more dangerously than the nuclear research approved of by congress of US."
8`40 imperial was the celebration with forty state and government boss in pc. Petersburg. But despite friendly thigh knocking Bushs could return serious interest conflicts faster than assumed - that finally showed the Iraq crisis.
Reporter: Peter Fritz from Washington, Lorenz Gallmetzer, Hans Woller from of Paris
camera: Graham Scott
editor: Felicity Tollkuhn, Peter Weiss
Music: the private psychedelic reel. The Chemical Brothers, CD of branch ral work ASW 6180, Take 11 time: 1'29 "
ORF
July 2003 - 9 min 00 sec
Shelters, tunnels and underground bunkers were hot topics before the war in Iraq.
Saddam’s presidential palace in Baghdad was assumed to house a network of such underground hideaways, and was quickly annihilated in the hunt to sniff out Hussein himself. But now, despite intensive searching, the Americans have not managed to find anything of the sort. But the change in focus of the international arms race – to create weapons specifically designed to seek and destroy underground bunkers - has lingered on. The most effective way of destroying subterranean hide-outs, according to proponents of a controversial new bunker busting bomb, is by using nuclear weapons.
0'43 The task of developing such a weapon has fallen on bomb manufacturer Los Alamos. The Bunker Busters, seen here in action penetrating an underground hiding place in Afghanistan, could in the future be equipped with atomic weapon-heads. Many republican senators see doing so as the utmost necessity.
0'58 (INSERT with 1'02") OT senator John Kyl (republican)?
We know from the secret service that there is a quantity of states, which know one: If one entrenches oneself deeply enough, with enough concrete and steel over the head, then they can not get one. Exactly our potential enemies build that today, and there is only one way against it: a precise, small nuclear weapon." ENG
1'20 These mini-atom bombs are intended to wreak their havoc far underground, according to the bomb’s supporters. Any bio-chemical weapons material hidden in underground bunkers would be instantly engulfed in a huge several thousand degree fireball and destroyed. Radiation would remain underground, well shielded from civilian populations.
But environmental organizations figure differently. They say, each of these atom bombs would pollute the earth around the bomb site, and is almost impossible to control..
1'56 "(INSERT with 1'59") Matthew McKinzie physicist, environmental's group of NRDC?
A ten kiloton bomb, which is many smaller than the bomb of Hiroshima, would have to explode 50 meters deeply in the earth, in order to cause no atomic fall out. The only deeply penetrating bomb, which we have at present, comes perhaps somewhat more than three meters deeply. If it penetrates more deeply, it becomes broken."
Short OT Kennedy (untranslated)
2'26 There is bitter opposition to the bomb. Democrat senator Edward Kennedy is worried about the consequences – what if the US deployed such a bomb in Syria, with fallout that could spread to Israel?
2'37 OT Edward Kennedy senator, democrat
Auf the side say the Americans to North Korea, look, we want with you to negotiate, in order to reduce the atomic danger in Korea, but then we say, do not hear not on what we say, we develop here new weapons. How is that to function in the today's world? Who removes us?
3'06 OT Donald Rumsfeld US Secretary of Defense
It is a study, nothing more and nothing less. It is not safe aiming at, no developing, no building, no stationing, and no use."
3'19 "OT Dianne Feinstein Senatorin, democrat?
Nur a study nonsense! Does that believe any? This resolution opens the doors for America to be able to develop over again nuclear weapons."
3'33 "in the Second World War had the researchers into of Los Alamos the atom bomb developed, now get them new, prestigious work. The research contracts for the building of the mini bombs and shelter crushers give again lift, possible next step to the atomic program are recent bomb tests.
3'52 "(INSERT with 3'55") Matthew McKinzie physicist, environmental's group of NRDC of?
Es gives the desire to use nuclear knowledge and abilities again which are fallow-convenient since the end of the cold war, and on which that possibly runs out, that is the retake of nuclear tests in the United States."
4'12 "also in the recent senatorial decree is of the fact the speech that new US atomic tests could come faster than expected. Still they are a world-wide taboo, but the USA reserve themselves to break this taboo at one time of their choice.
4`29 of one of the most renowned European armament experts, Francois Heisbourg, evaluates the American decision calmly. As long as they served only the deterrence, new nuclear weapons were actually still no enormous increase of the risk:
4`42 Ot Professor Francois Heisbourg, ii-S S and IR of Paris
"already since the end of the forties developed and also stationed the USA incessant tactical nuclear weapons, thus?mini nukes". The pallet reaches from nuclear mortar cannons, nuclear luft-Luft-Raketen, nuclear underwater mines - up to the famous?Rucksack bombs "- which was everything in Europe up to the end of the cold war stationed. Thus it would be wrong to call that now revolution."
5`25 indeed was remarkably that with the 300-Jahr-Feiern in pc. Petersburg on the past weekend the American resumption of the nuclear arms research was mentioned by of Russia president Putin with no word, at least not public. In the opposite: one zelebrierte proudly the last signature under of the Russian Duma only days before ratified disarmament agreement SORT. Therefore the USA and Russia want to reduce their strategic nuclear weapons in ten years to one thousand seven hundreds each to two thousand two hundred sprengkoepfe.
6`03 PUTIN (clay/tone on) 6`07 it gives no alternative to co-operation between America and Russia, meant Putin. That applies to the armements policy, in addition, to the fight against the terrorism and to international stability.
6`20 the old arsenals are vacated, destroyed rockets - partly by breakup in air like here - with worth millions financial assistance from the west. President Putin likewise announced the development of new and modern nuclear weapons at the same time. A new arms race?
6`46 - OT Francois Heisbourg "the danger of a return to the arms race proceeds not with the current American decision, but from the Bush doctrine... With this doctrine of the preventive impact say the USA, it unpopular states will attack, before these are in the possession of massenvernichtungswaffen. That it is to be become also a reason for it that North Korea doubled its efforts, an adequate country possessing atomic weapons and the fact that Iran in Natan must take and elsewhere as fast as possible Transfugeuse....baut "
7`37 Russia again its place under prominent powers of the world, demanded president Putin recently and quit a large modernization of the army on......... But not that will lead present world politics of the Bush government to new tensions with the USA, but.
HEISBOURG?Grosse tensions between Russia and the USA to grow up I see
7`53 Ot because of the kind of Washington of treating the Iran question. In pc. Petersburg and with the G-8-Gipfel in Evian much was discussed. And I fear tensions between the USA and most partners due to the doctrine of prevention and the preventive impact, because this doctrine moves outside of all rules of the international right. I find that many more dangerously than the nuclear research approved of by congress of US."
8`40 imperial was the celebration with forty state and government boss in pc. Petersburg. But despite friendly thigh knocking Bushs could return serious interest conflicts faster than assumed - that finally showed the Iraq crisis.
Reporter: Peter Fritz from Washington, Lorenz Gallmetzer, Hans Woller from of Paris
camera: Graham Scott
editor: Felicity Tollkuhn, Peter Weiss
Music: the private psychedelic reel. The Chemical Brothers, CD of branch ral work ASW 6180, Take 11 time: 1'29 "
ORF